Don Davies

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 16th, 2020]

With regard to testing for SARS-CoV-2: (a) for each month since March, 2020, (i) what SARS-CoV-2 testing devices were approved, including the name, manufacturer, device type, whether the testing device is intended for laboratory or point-of-care use, and the date authorized, (ii) what was the length in days between the submission for authorization and the final authorization for each device; (b) for each month since March, how many Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 have been (i) procured, (ii) deployed across Canada; (c) for what testing devices has the Minister of Health issued an authorization for importation and sale under the authority of the interim order respecting the importation and sale of medical devices for use in relation to COVID-19; (d) for each testing device so authorized, which ones, as outlined in section 4(3) of the interim order, provided the minister with information demonstrating that the sale of the COVID-19 medical device was authorized by a foreign regulatory authority; and (e) of the antigen point-of-care testing devices currently being reviewed by Health Canada, which are intended for direct purchase or use by a consumer at home?

[COVID-19 Vaccine, November 16th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, as COVID cases rise across the country, access to a safe, effective vaccine is critically important to Canadians and their families. While there has been some encouraging news about vaccine candidates, the Liberal government has not been transparent about the deals it has signed with pharmaceutical companies, and it has refused to make them public as other countries have done.

It is alarming to hear reports that Canadians will get the vaccine months after other countries, such as the U.K. and the U.S., and while nations such as Australia, Japan and India have negotiated contracts that allow them to produce the vaccine in their own countries to ensure people get it quickly, apparently the Canadian government has not done this. People are rightfully wondering why.

Canadians have sacrificed profoundly to keep their families and neighbours safe. They deserve to know what the government has agreed to behind closed doors. The New Democrats are going to keep fighting for answers, because when it comes to our health, it is unacceptable for the Liberals to keep Canadians in the dark.

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Madam Chair, the question was on whether the government supports a guaranteed livable income, and once again, I note that there is no answer to that question.

I want to move to long-term care. We know that 80% of the deaths to COVID-19 in this country happened in long-term care homes, giving Canada the worst record of any OECD country. Given that Canada is currently in the grips of the second wave and outbreaks in long-term care facilities have been rising in recent weeks, can the minister confirm when the national standards mentioned in the recent throne speech will be brought into force? Will the national standards be tied to new federal funding to meet those standards for long-term care in the provinces?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Madam Chair, the question was about testing. All the experts tell us that in order to get control of transmission, we must have vigorous testing and contact tracing. How much of the $4.28 billion allocated for testing has been spent? I did not get an answer to that.

I am going to move on. The minister has talked about the importance of social determinants of health. According to the Public Health Agency of Canada's recent report on an equity-based approach to COVID-19, “COVID-19 has underscored the inequities in health that are shaped by these [social] determinants [of health], highlighted how these inequities may be exacerbated in the context of a pandemic, and shown how they can aggravate and prolong the spread of disease, making the pandemic worse.”

Would the government and minister support the implementation of a guaranteed livable income to address the inequities shaped by the social determinants of health?

[Income Tax Act, November 5th, 2020]

Madam Chair, I think we all recognize that Canada has experienced severe economic shocks periodically over the last century. However, what is notable about the present one is that this was caused by a health crisis. It has not only shown us how important it is to have a strong public health care system, but it has exposed, for all to see, the cracks, the deep crevasses that exist in our public health care system.

I am going to be addressing my questions to health care. The federal government has earmarked $4.28 billion to support provinces and territories with the costs of increasing their capacity to conduct testing, perform contact tracing and share public health data. How much of that funding has been spent to date?

[Income Tax Act, November 4th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, too many businesses in my riding are being excluded from the emergency business account, the CEBA, because contracts after March 1 are not included in the $40,000 expenses required to access the loan. One constituent recently pointed out to me that many businesses did not begin feeling the effects of COVID-19 until well after March 1. In fact, the Liberal government did not even create a committee to begin studying the possible effects of COVID-19 until March 4, 2020. Business owners in my constituency and across Canada who have sacrificed so much during COVID-19 should be supported by their government. There are others across this country in similar situations.

I am wondering if my hon. colleague would agree with me that we need a change in the CEBA eligibility to allow expenses beyond the current March 1, 2020, deadline to help these small businesses who are struggling so hard.

[Housing, October 30th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, Canada had a severe housing crisis before the outbreak of COVID-19, but due to the severe economic impacts of the pandemic, many more Canadians are at risk of losing their homes. They need the federal government to help, yet in my riding of Vancouver Kingsway an agency of the government is ordering the Still Creek Housing Co-op to raise its rents by over 5%.

Will the Liberals instruct the CMHC to cancel this policy that will hurt many single-parent families, low-income individuals, disabled folks and seniors?

[Business of Supply, October 29th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add my voice to those of my colleagues who are disappointed the hon. member spent almost all of his time speaking about the COVID recovery and not the motion before the House, which I think raises a very important issue.

I am proud to be a New Democrat and very proud of the fact that in the 1970 October crisis our party stood in the House and opposed the War Measures Act. We did so because of its extreme suspension of and attack on civil liberties. I keep hearing about how the fact the Province of Quebec and the City of Montreal wanted federal government involvement somehow justifies the move by the federal government and Pierre Trudeau to suspend civil liberties in this country.

I wonder if my hon. colleague has any comment. Does he agree the decision by Pierre Elliott Trudeau in the seventies to suspend the civil liberties of Quebeckers was a justified response when there were obviously great political problems in Quebec at that time?

[Health, October 29th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across this country are deeply concerned about their parents and grandparents in long-term care. Shamefully, seniors living in for-profit homes are four times more likely to become infected and die from COVID-19 than those in non-profit homes. That is unacceptable and it shows what happens when profits, instead of quality care for seniors, are the priority. Every dollar must go to the well-being of patients.

Will the government commit to getting profits out of long-term care to ensure seniors are safe in these centres?

[Criminal Code, October 27th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, very few subjects in federal politics are more sensitive than the one before us today as parliamentarians. Of course, this all comes from the Carter decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that Canadians had a constitutional right to access physician-assisted death. Therefore, our job is to craft the best possible system to facilitate that right while we ensure there are the proper protections.

My question is about one of the challenges created by the current medical assistance in dying legislation, which is the requirement for final consent at the time assistance is rendered. This sometimes forces those already assessed and approved for medical assistance in dying to make a cruel choice when faced with the possible loss of competence that would then make them unable to give consent, with the result that they are forced to go earlier or risk not being able to receive the assistance they need to avoid continuing to live with intolerable pain.

I wonder if my hon. colleague has some comments on how the government ought to best deal with that situation.